₦airaland Forum

kinggenesis:
Who did Jesus tell the Lord’s Prayer to?

(Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 & 7:28) Jesus delivered the Lord’s Prayer
during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes.

(Luke 11:1-4) He delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount.

Luke 11:5-13 shows that He repeated the same prayer to the disciples giving them an illustration of what He meant when He said Ask and keep on asking and you will receive:importunity and persistence. That the 10 commandments appear in Exodus and Deuteronomy does not mean there was a contradiction; it only shows a necessary repetition to aid remembrance.


P.S.: I must appreciate how you make it one after the other; keep it up!

kinggenesis:
Where did Christ ascend from?

From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12

From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

Both! Bethany is located on the Eastern slope of Mount Olivet! Meaning HE must have led them up the Mount by that way!

kinggenesis:
Can all sins be forgiven?

(Acts 13:39) ALL sins can be forgiven.

Great, I’m happy to know God is so merciful, but wait ooo...

(Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is
unforgivable.

You ought to have quoted what Acts 13:39 said! Paul plainly said through faith in Christ, they will be justified from all things that the law could not justify them from!. What were those things?

kinggenesis:
Is scripture inspired by God?

"all scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16

"But I speak this by permission and not by commandment." 1
Corinthians 7:6"

But to the rest speak I, NOT the Lord." 1 Corinthians 7:12

"That which I speak, I speak it NOT after the Lord" 2 Corinthians.

The highlighted is true! Lordship implies command hence Paul was saying that the thigs he was about to write were inspired but not binding obligations.
1 Corinthians 7:40
But in my opinion, she will be happier if she remains as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God!

Meaning he was inspired but what was written were not obligations but guidance which only those gifted can follow.



The ones quoted afterwards simply reiterated what Christ said that it is not a command binding on all His disciples but those who are gifted for such:

Matthew 19:11,12 (NET)
11 He said to them, “Not everyone can accept this statement, except those to whom it has been given.
12 For there are some eunuchs who were that way from birth, and some who were made eunuchs by others, and some who became eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who is able to accept this should accept it.”

kinggenesis:
Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death?

"The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by our law he
ought to die." John 19:7

"The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death."John 18:31

The Jews (who you just quoted) openly contradicted themselves and their law just because they wanted Jesus out of the way; this happened just as prophesied:

Isaiah 53:8 (NET)
He was led away after an unjust trial—
but who even cared?
Indeed, he was cut off from the land of the living;
because of the rebellion of his own people he was wounded.

Endeavour to research thoroughly who said what before making claims.

Does this apply to all songs or only secular/suggestive songs?

lexiconkabir:
please stop it right here, you are already contradicting yourself. since the trinity is the back bone of christianity shouldnt it be easy to explain?why i'm i having a hard time to understand it, with all you are saying, it still tells me what i know before that christ, God and spirit are THREE different being not ONE. well let me pretend to agree with your lectures, dont quote me again pls(no offences meant), thank you sire!

The Gospel is the backbone of Christianity! If that is received, we can move on to the higher mysteries.
I had to quote you because your use of the word 'since' suggests that was something we discussed before which is not true!

McSterling:
What prophecies? You sure know the Jews have different interpretations of these "prophecies" which have nothing at all to do with the Messiah or Jesus. In fact, some of these so called "prophecies" that the early Christians feasted on clearly had nothing to do with Jesus, since they had already happened.

I wish you will outline some of these prophecies! The other time I made a similar request your response was to accuse me of insincerity! Is it the prophecy of Jesus being born in Bethlehem (unmistakably affirmed by the Jews also stated in Micah 5:2) or that He will be killed for sins He never committed (Daniel 9/ Isaiah 53)? Even if the Jews gave many interpretations we have the same prophecies and the Spirit gives their meanings!

Certainly, inspiration by a divine, omniscient entity[b] should make one an island of knowledge[/b]. The knowledge we are even concerned with here isn't brobdingnagian. It is rather quite simple. A precise, punctilious chronological account of Jesus' life. This shouldn't be such a big deal especially when one is under the influence of an omniscient entity.

As per the highlighted, that was not the purpose of His coming; just like saying the Body of Christ should consist of just one person!
Ephesians 4:11-13
11And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

12 for the equipping of the [d]saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;

13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature [f]which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

Verse 11 shows God intends everyone function in his office if Knowledge of Christ will be clear Vs13. In spite of your opinion,this is God's purpose, take it or leave it!



Besides, the substance of the Gospel (Christ's birth, death and resurrection) remains unchanged and that was the purpose of the Gospels. Most questions that arose in those days was in the area of prophecies and principles according to the Law and Prophets and the Gospels were written to lead readers to faith in Christ. Issues being raised today on , who rolled the stone, who did not go afishing etc are peripheries the inclusion or omission neither adds to nor diminishes the essence of the Gospel!

This epistle you've posted precisely makes my point. You can not precisely answer the questions I posed. Because by attempting to do so, you'd also be invalidating some of the other gospel accounts. Certainly, there couldn't have been one and two angels in the tomb at a time. The stone couldn't have been both in place and rolled away when the women arrived. They can't all be right. Something's got to give. At least some, if not all, of the gospels are very wrong about what really happened

Alright consider this:


An angel rolls away the stone from the tomb before sunrise (Matthew 28:2-4). The guards are seized with fear and eventually flee.
2. Women disciples visit the tomb and discover Christ missing (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1).
3. Mary Magdalene leaves to tell Peter and John (John 20:1-2).
4. Other women remain at the tomb; they see two angels who tell them of Christ's resurrection (Matthew 28:5-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:4-.
5. Peter and John run to the tomb and then leave (Luke 24:12; John 20:3-10).
6. Christ's First Appearance: Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb; Christ appears to her (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18).
7. Christ's Second Appearance: Jesus appears to the other women (Mary, mother of James, Salome, and Joanna) (Matthew 28:8-10).
8. At this time, the guards report the events to the religious leaders and are bribed to lie (Matthew 28:11-15).
9. Christ's Third Appearance: Jesus privately appears to Peter (1 Corinthians 15:5).
10. Christ's Fourth Appearance: Jesus appears to Cleopas and companion (Mark 16:12-13; Luke 24:13-32).
11. Christ's Fifth Appearance: Jesus appears to 10 apostles, with Thomas missing, in the Upper Room (Luke 24:36-43).
12. Christ's Sixth Appearance: Eight days after His appearance to the 10 apostles, Jesus appears to all 11 apostles, including Thomas (John 20:26-28).
13. Christ's Seventh Appearance: Jesus appears to 7 disciples by the Sea of Galilee and performs the miracle of the fish (John 21:1-14).
14. Christ's Eight Appearance: Jesus appears to 500 on a mountain in Galilee (Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:15-18; 1 Corinthians 15:6).
15. Christ's Ninth Appearance: Jesus appears to His half-brother James (1 Corinthians 15:7).
16. Christ's Tenth Appearance: In Jerusalem, Jesus appears again to His disciples (Acts 1:3-.
17. Christ's Eleventh Appearance: Jesus ascends into Heaven while the disciples look on (Mark 16:19-20; Luke 24:50-53; Acts 1:9-12).

Conclusions

The different perspectives in the gospel's accounts of Christ's resurrection are indicative of the veracity of the eye witness statements. Those who have seen something unexpected often report the details in somewhat of a frenetic and seemingly disconnected way, as they attempt to communicate the depth of what they have witnessed even while processing the events for themselves. Were the gospel writers or the disciples lying, they would have presented a uniform story. And the same critics who try to point out contradictions in the gospels would no doubt cry 'collusion' if they found exact verbal parallelism and a singular account of the resurrection.

In the end, the recordings of the resurrection found in the four gospels harmonize quite well upon closer examination, and perhaps most importantly, strongly agree on the one key fact that has universal life impact: Christ is risen from the dead!
http://www.compellingtruth.org/resurrection-accounts.html

lexiconkabir:
sorry to digress, are you saying God and Jesus are 2 different people? pls answer with yes/no

point of correction, they are not 'people'. Jesus is One with the Father (God) and He is also The Son of God.

lexiconkabir:
@scholar8200 you are still saying the same thing in another form, you are yet to clearify contradiction 3, i read jer 31 as you opined, but it doesnt explain contradiction 3.

Per contradiction 3, Jesus said the law will not go unfulfilled (not the same thing as break) GOD gave the law as the terms of the Covenant and even though man failed, since God had said none of His Words will fall to the ground (Isaiah 55:11),someone had to fulfil it and that was Christ! Point was the Word in the Old covenant had to be fulfilled (not laid aside) if a New Covenant would be established.

lexiconkabir:
@scholar8200 does it make sense to you? that if i break a law today means that the law wont hold for others that have not broken it? check out this verse, For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.(mattew 5:18 king james version) notice he said "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law" which included not eating swine(pork), how can you still say that the law was broken? when jesus is saying no law will in no wise pass from the law. contradiction number 3. pls explain.

[quote author=lexiconkabir post=36388649]@scholar You need to understand that the law was given as part of a Covenant based on God's promise to Abraham. I wish you read the places in Jeremiah 31:32 and Exodus 24 quoted before. And regarding fulfilment, note that Jesus Himself said He came to fulfil the law (no one fully did until Christ; it had to be fulfilled) a tittle or jot of which was not to go unfulfilled. If you carefully consider Jeremiah 31:32, it says they broke a covenant, the law as a part of the old covenant was the reference.
Hence, it will be wrong to see the law as some stand-alone constitution like you are doing. Also note that Jeremiah 31:32 was God speaking, not me.

lexiconkabir:
@scholar8200 did you say christ "dying" on the cross broke the law of moses given to the isrealites? what happened to the verse where jesus himself said he has not come to abolish the law of moses, but to fulfil it? contradiction number 2 pls explain so i can understand your explanation on contradiction number 1.

I did not say Jesus broke the law! He fulfilled it. The law was broken by man (see Jeremiah 31 quoted); Jesus fulfilled its requirements and paid the penalty for its violation ( penalty He did not deserve since He was not guilty but we were)

lexiconkabir:
bro a lot! but let me 1 for now, in one part you are told all things are clean so you can eat everything, another part says you are forbidden to eat swine(pork), explain pls.

Okay.
1. The part that forbade the eating of swine was in the law given to the Israelites as part of the terms of their covenant with God (they entered this covenant in Exodus 24). There, animals were classified between ceremonially clean and unclean.

2. The covenant thus made was broken repeatedly see
Jeremiah 31:32
32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord.

Jesus Christ came, fulfilled Man's terms of the covenant making it possible for the establishment of the New covenant based on different terms.
By His death on the cross, the Old Covenant (which was already broken) reached it's full application and came to its end.
Even Jesus said
Mark 7:19-23
19 Since it does not reach and enter his heart but [only his] digestive tract, and so passes on [into the place designed to receive waste]? Thus He was making and declaring all foods [ceremonially] clean [that is, [h]abolishing the ceremonial distinctions of the Levitical Law].
20 And He said, What comes out of a man is what makes a man unclean and renders [him] unhallowed.
21 For from within, [that is] out of the hearts of men, come base and wicked thoughts, sexual immorality, stealing, murder, adultery,
22 Coveting (a greedy desire to have more wealth), dangerous and destructive wickedness, deceit; [i]unrestrained (indecent) conduct; an evil eye (envy), slander (evil speaking, malicious misrepresentation, abusiveness), pride ([j]the sin of an uplifted heart against God and man), foolishness (folly, lack of sense, recklessness, thoughtlessness).
23 All these evil [purposes and desires] come from within, and they make the man unclean and render him unhallowed.



That's why the ceremonial parts (observance of special ceremonies, washings, avoidance of physical leaven etc) were done away with. The terms of the New Covenant with Christ, unlike the OT, focuses on the spiritual and reveals itself in the physical (as an effect of what had occurred internally) unlike the OT that was more of external observances.

The Gospel is:

John 3:16-18
For God so loved the world, that He gave His [e]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the [f]only begotten Son of God.


Many have turned from their sins and believed on Him as their Saviour and Lord and they have been saved!

It remains true today!

lexiconkabir:
@scholar8200 @malvisguy212 This is exactly what i wanted you guys to do, you know why? cuz the bible is contradictory to itself, it is inconsistent, has "GRAVE" mistakes(as king james editors said), concocted and corrupted by man, which draws the conclusion that christinity is BASELESS!!! savvy?

Alright, your opinion is your right. However, can you give specifics were a principle or prophesy was contradicted? And, what were the 'grave mistakes' referred to?

McSterling:
Asking this shows that you're either simply being insincere or plain ignorant.

Interesting!

What proof have you that the gnostic gospels were "contaminated"? There were diverse Christian sects beginning from the first century CE. As much as we know, gnosticism dates back to the first century too. The fact that the Christian view which you now consider orthodox was adopted by Constantine's state church, doesn't mean it is any more credible or less "contaminated".If the gnostics or any other sect had won the doctrinal war, perhaps gnosticism would be your "truth" today.

This is why I spoke about weighing each book with the balance of the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels and the Epistles! Since the Gospels were about Christ, we consider all that was said about Him in the Law,Prophets and Psalms both in prophesy and type. Using this method, it will be easy to differentiate truth from counterfeit gospels. I am persuaded that some authors of the other 'gospels' were oblivious of the fact of the prophesies.

My parameter It isn't my parameter. Like I stated before, it is one of the methods used by historians to establish that an event did occur in the past. As a Christian, you can of course personally believe everything in the Bible by faith, but for any biblical account to be established historically as fact, it must pass the necessary tests. Just like there is the scientific method, there also is the historical method.

Even in sciences, methods have been changed meaning they were discovered to be faulty; I guess the same liberty should be allowed academic historians.

I fail to understand how the contradictions in the gospels are complementary?

when I said complementary, I mean Matthew will include details left out by Luke vice versa. You may ask," were they not supposed to be inspired?" I answer," Inspiration does not make us an Island/Repository of all knowledge. Else, we wouldnt need church/fellowship since those who receive the Spirit are to 'know everything'!"

I would like you to give precise answers to these questions:
What were the last words of Jesus on the cross?
Did the two thieves crucified with Jesus ridicule him or only one?
Who saw the risen Christ first?
Who were the group of women that visited the tomb that morning?
Was the stone rolled away before or after they arrived?
How many angels( or men) did they see?
Where did they see these angels? Inside the tomb? Outside it? Sitting on the rolled-away stone?Standing?
Did Magdalene see Jesus himself rather than the angels?
Where were the disciples told they'd see Jesus?
Where did Jesus appear to his disciples and gave his final command?

I believe this will answer your questions, patiently read through.

The apostle Paul stated, “If Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ.… And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins… . If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (I Corinthians 15:14, 15, 17, 19, KJV).

A common objection to the fact of the resurrection is that the four Gospel narratives contain hopeless contradictions. If the four accounts were placed in parallel columns, a number of apparent differences would be highlighted. However, these apparent differences ultimately confirm the truthfulness of these accounts, rather than refute them.

If all four Gospels gave exactly the same story, in exactly the same order, with exactly the same details, we would immediately become suspicious. We could also wonder why all four writers did not simply attach their names as co-authors of one account. Obviously, this is not the case. None of the four Gospels gives all the details of what transpired.

Matthew is the only writer who records the first appearance to the women, while only in Luke do we find the account of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. The appearance of Mary Magdalene is omitted by both Matthew and Luke. Only John records the appearance of our Lord in the upper room, when Thomas was absent and the appearance on the sea of Galilee.

It is quite clear that all of the Gospels relate their portraits of Jesus differently. This is what we should expect. No four witnesses (or news reporters), all of whom witness a series of events, will write them up in exactly the same way, detail for detail. If they did, there would be obvious collusion.

If the differences concerned the main points of the story, then there would be justification for doubt, but when the salient points are agreed upon by every witness, insignificant differences add to, rather than subtract from, the validity.

It should be noted, too, that none of the details necessarily flatly contradicts any others, but in some plausible way they correlate together to supply the larger picture. The variations in detail the different writers chose to include in the resurrection narratives consist of incidental things which in no way jeopardize the main plot of the story.

One of the seeming contradictions that bothers people concerns the time the women came to the tomb, related differently by John and Mark. Mark’s account has the women coming to the tomb at the rising of the sun, while John states that Mary Magdalene came to the tomb when it was dark.

This difficulty is solved when it is realized that the women had to walk quite some distance to reach the grave, since they stayed in Jerusalem or Bethany. It was dark when they left the place in which they were staying, but when they arrived at the tomb the sun was beginning to shine. Therefore, Mark is speaking of their arrival, while John refers to their departure.

The area which has generated the most discussion concerns the angels who were at the tomb of Jesus. Matthew and Mark relate that one angel addressed the women, while Luke and John say that two angels were at the tomb.

This seems to be a discrepancy, with Matthew and Mark knowing of only one angel while Luke and John speak of two. However, Matthew and Mark do not say that there was only one angel at the tomb, but that one angel spoke to the women.

This does not contradict Luke and John, for Matthew and Mark specify that one angel spoke, but they do not say there was only one angel present or only one angel spoke. Quite possibly one of the angels served as the spokesman for the two, thus he was emphasized. There is no need to assume a discrepancy.

Though they report some of the details differently, the Gospels agree in all important points. The accounts are in harmony on the fact that Jesus was dead and buried; that the disciples were not prepared for His death, but were totally confused; that the tomb was empty on Easter morning; that the empty tomb did not convince them that Jesus had risen; that Mary thought the body had been stolen.

The Gospel writers also concur that the disciples had certain experiences which they believed to be appearances of the resurrected Christ. That normative first century Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah is a historical fact.

The disciples proclaimed the resurrection story in Jerusalem, in the place where Jesus had been killed and buried. All these facts considered together constitute a powerful argument for the validity of the resurrection story.

The venerable scholar, Wilbur Smith, had this to say about the differences in the resurrection accounts and the areas in which the Gospels agree:

“In these fundamental truths, there are absolutely no contradictions. The so-called variations in the narratives are only the details which were mostly vividly impressed on one mind or another of the witnesses of our Lord’s resurrection, or on the mind of the writers of these four respective Gospels.

“The closest, most critical, examination of these narratives throughout the ages never has destroyed and can never destroy their powerful testimony to the truth that Christ did rise from the dead on the third day, and was seen of many” (The Supernaturalness of Christ, W.A. Wilde Company, 1954, p. 205).
George Ladd, I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus, Eerdmans, 1975
Wilbur Smith, The Supernaturalness of Christ, W.A. Wilde Company, 1954
W.J. Sparrow-Simpson, The Resurrection and the Christian Faith, Zondervan, 1968
Merrill Tenney, The Reality of the Resurrection, Harper and Row, 1963
Answers to Tough Questions Skeptics Ask About the Christian Faith, P. 85
http://www.josh.org/resources/study-research/answers-to-skeptics-questions/how-do-you-explain-contradictions-in-the-resurrection-story/

malvisguy212:
can you quote were Jesus say the above ?

John 17:21-23
21 that all of them may be one, Father,
JUST AS YOU ARE IN ME AND I AM IN YOU. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one — 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity.Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

This is the prayer of Jesus in human nature praying, just as God is in Him (Jesus). They all may be one In the father and this prayer was answer:

Acts 4:32
All the believers were ONE in heart and
mind. No one claimed that any of their
possessions was their own, but they
shared everything they had.

Precisely! In fact that prayer was in keeping with the purposes of God:

Jeremiah 32:39 etc
39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may [reverently] fear Me forever for the good of themselves and of their children after them.

It is only natural that God Who made us in His Image will desire us to be one in heart too!!

lexiconkabir:
@malvisguy212 According to what you are saying: Jesus was God-incarnate, full man and full God. Can the finite and the infinite be one? "To be full" God means freedom from finite forms and from helplessness, and to be "full man" means the absence of divinity. in the bible there is a story about devil tempting jesus taking him places, if jesus is "full God"(the almighty), how can devil have such audacity to tempt God and CARRY him to places? isnt it in the bible that anybody that comes out from a woman is impure, which means if jesus was "full God" then he must have lost his divinity, having coming out from a woman. malvis i will open another thread surely, but you should be able to singlehandedly defend your faith, hence please clearify my doubts(i really wanna know the truth).

He did not lost His Divinity! He layed it down:

Philipians 2:5-7

5 Let this same attitude and purpose and [humble] mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus: [Let Him be your example in humility:]
6 Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God], did not [c]think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped [d]or retained,
7 [b]But stripped Himself [of all privileges and [e]rightful dignity], so as to assume the guise of a servant (slave), in that He became like men and was born a human being.

Also see John 1:14
14 And the Word (Christ) became flesh (human, incarnate) and tabernacled (fixed His tent of flesh, lived awhile) among us; and we [actually] saw His glory (His honor, His majesty), such glory as an only begotten son receives from his father, full of grace (favor, loving-kindness) and truth.

lexiconkabir:
that was almost convincing(i just wanna know the truth), but again there was a contradiction. that op said, "the word is jesus and he has flesh and bones" which means since God said "be!" and it was, hence jesus was created now two people are in scene here(no more one) yet that op concluded that they are still one. he even said "no wonder jesus said he and his father one" but it is also known in the bible where jesus also said he, his father and his disciples are one(john 17:21-23). please why were the other verses verse given different meanings?

Let's consider John 17:21-23
21 that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also [size=13pt]may be[/size] one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be [/b]one, [b]even as we are one:
23[b] I in them[/b], and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

That chapter records Jesus' prayer for His disciples hence He affirms His union with the Father and prays that the disciples MAY experience same by virtue of His dwelling in them; He did not say they were already one with God!

Notice the highlighted where Christ affirmed His Union with the Father;this union was there before the Incarnation:

John 1:18
18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Furthermore, John 3:31 was the testimony of John the Baptist, His forerunner

He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

McSterling:
Actually, John is very different from the synoptic gospels. This is an established fact. And it's the latest of the four, giving room for embellishments. There are/were many gospels. Stop emphasising on four like there aren't more. Four were only selected at the council of Nicea by men no smarter than you. What all these gospels have in common is that there were not written by eye witnesses.
It however reduces the reliability of the account. One of the methods historians use to establish that an event did happen in the past is agreement between independent sources. If there aren't outside sources to support said account, it can not be established.

1. Give those embellishments and show how they contradict other prophesies, patterns and principles in the Law, Prophets, Epistles and other Gospels!

2. A good number of the other 'gospels' are the ones contaminated by the gnostics: a cult that existed in pre-christian times. It was the error of this same cult that Paul confronted in the Epistle to the Colossians. In fact it wont be illogical to say that the emphasis of the Divinity of Christ by John shows that he was also countering the lie of the Gnostics (existence of lesser, intermediary gods and perhaps trying to make Jesus one of them). That is why John specifically wrote:
1 John 4:2,3a
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist,

The highlighted was a direct rebuttal to the lie of the gnostic gospellers that Christ did not actual come in the flesh (rings a bell!.) because of their belief that the flesh is intrinsically evil.

3.Would we also write off the 1,2 and 3 John and the Revelations? A careful consideration of the former shows a similarity in style with the Gospel of John viz: a mystical perspective.

4. That John was silent about the transfiguration in his Gospel does not means he denied it; in fact he later referred to it in 1 John.

5. The record of Zacchaeus, parable of Lazarus and the rich man etc are peculiar only to Luke, going by your parameter, do we then discredit those too?

Inspiration was not designed to foster independence and mental perfection; the 4 Gospels that made it into the Bible are complementary and prove that, in spite of what the devil may try God will preserve that which is His:

Isaiah 34:16
Seek from the book of the Lord, and read:

Not one of these will be missing;
None will lack its mate.
For His mouth has commanded,
And His Spirit has gathered them.

Op, if you read through the Epistle to the Galatians as well as Acts 15, it is clear that what is forbidden is Circumcision as a MEANS of salvation; go down to Colossians 2, the list includes Observance of days and ordinances. Now I have not heard any Nigerian Pastor preach along these lines before.

But when it comes to the Moral law or the Righteous demands of the Law, this is what is written:

Romans 8:4,12,13
4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

12 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it.

13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.


The last verse shows that we still have an obligation to, in the power of the Spirit through faith, live & walk in the Spirit thus fulfilling the requirements of the law.

Galatians 5:19-21
Lists some of the symptoms of those walking in the flesh and concludes saying:

I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Pls bear in mind that these Epistles were written to believers.


2 Peter was written to Gentile believers and this warning against backsliding was not misplaced:

2Peter 2:20

20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first.(NASB)


and

2 Peter 3:17
You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, (NASB)

Maksky:
CLEARLY THIS ONE DIDN'T BOTHER TO READ THE ARTICLE OR IF HE/SHE DID, NO COMPREHENSION WAS GAINED


You asked to be shown parts of the gospel of John that is not in agreement with other gospels and epistles, then READ reasons 2 and 4 of the article I presented through the link

The gospels complement one another. You will readily agree with me that no man is an island of knowledge;I will also add that the Spirit was not sent to make individuals islands of knowledge, independent of others! Else what is the role of teaching and preaching if every believer is to know everything?

Hence, four gospels was given that one might complement the other.

Now for reason 2, the fact that other gospels did not record that event does not mean it did not happen! The fact that other Gospels did not record the encounter of Christ with the woman of Samaria at the well does not mean it did not happen! The degree of bias of the author is alarming! Why refer to John as the author in point 3 only to deny this in point 1 Like I said,the coming of the Spirit and Inspiration does not make us independent of other believers! Now, did Christ command them not to stone her? The people who wanted to execute the law were also guilty! Was that God's purpose for the law: punishment to the one not smart enough to cover his tracks (though all be guilty?!)


Then point 4, the substance of the matter is that Jesus died and rose from the dead as prophesied! If John had said something different, it would have merited our attention!

Clicking on the link, I saw an inscription in arabic which made me know what to expect.


See, millions have heard or read and believed in accordance to John 3:16 and were not disappointed: they received Life and were free from condemnation; others have read John 17 and as they sought God, received the gift of a heart made pure; as they continued in the Lord, they died and some even rejoiced and testified of entering into God's Presence and shortly died in peace. This was the goal of other Gospels and the Gospel of John! That is what matters!

John 20:30,31
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.


In addition, the points you referred to only pointed to Matthew; how about the Epistles, Prophets and the Law and what they had to say about Christ vis a vis the Gospel of John? etc Or will you say Jesus was also breaking the law when HE healed on the sabbath as recorded by Luke and Mark? Or when He declared," The Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath" Matthew 12:8?

bananaboi:
thank you sir for the reply. We don't actually have any serious crisis in my family, my dad is always against her jumping from one church to another, and like you've said shes just obsessed with the so called magicians (prophets).
I will think about what you've said. Thanks for the reply.

We thank God

First you need to surrender your life to Christ. Next, whatever church you attend, be a student of the Bible and reject any teaching or concept not taught or found therein especially in the New Testament.

From what you have written, you have encountered the influence of strange prophets (and their faith wrecking practices) who practise things not found in scripture. She appears to be obsessed with them but you are the one that ,through prayer and patience, can help her see the fact that these practices are not of God, and these prophets are deceiving her and milking her dry in exchange for nothing.

Becoming an agnostic is a selfish way out because you will be leaving her at the mercy of the wolves (and they are known for their merchandising and enslaving tactics). Besides, whatever family problems that led her to seek solutions where none exists will still persist.

I am persuaded that there might be some challenges in the family that inform her need for Divine intervention ; why not take these up in prayer (if you are a child of God) and even make audible declarations that will be a bond to compel you to pray until something happens (without the 'aid' of these 'prophets').
In fact, such answers to prayer are a strong point of persuasion.

Moreover, op, can you show me parts of the Gospel of John that is not in agreement with the Law , Prophets and other Gospels and Epistles?

Remember:
Isaiah 9:6

6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Was God's declaration through Isaiah.

Besides, David was inspired when he said:

Psalm 110:1
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Indeed, the sins committed before we were saved are totally forgiven and atoned for; but for the ones whose repercussions may come and even those repercussions can be dealt with if we understood redemption being a release from guilt, power and consequence of sin.

However, there is the need to be watchful: We cannot dispense with the scriptures that clearly say God sometimes need to discipline or chastise us (I believe this is not without a cause):

Hebrews 12:10,11

10 For [our earthly fathers] disciplined us for only a short period of time and chastised us as seemed proper and good to them; but He disciplines us for our certain good, that we may become sharers in His own holiness.
11 For the time being no discipline brings joy, but seems grievous and painful; but afterwards it yields a peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it [a harvest of fruit which consists in righteousness—in conformity to God’s will in purpose, thought, and action, resulting in right living and right standing with God].

This is similar to the passage where Jesus spoke about people being beaten with few or many stripes for inactions without or with knowledge respectively.

[quote author=channelz post=36332385][/quote]Abraham told a lie and he was made to confess it in Genesis 20:10-12
10 And Abimelech said to Abraham, What did you see [in us] that [justified] you in doing such a thing as this?
11 And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely there is no reverence or fear of God at all in this place, and they will slay me because of my wife.
12 But truly, she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father but not of my mother; and she became my wife.

Hence that quote is not applicable.

Besides, how about others like this Hebrews 1:2,3,5,8? Do we edit them too? Let me amplify this one:

Hebrews 1:8

But as to the Son, He says to Him, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever (to the ages of the ages), and the scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of absolute righteousness (of justice and straightforwardness).

and Titus 1:13 not forgetting 1 Timothy 3:16?

Maksky:
Ask a Trinitarian for evidence of the divinity of Jesus and they will undoubtedly direct you to Gospel of John. Evidence put forward from this Gospel is ambiguous at best and often taken out of context or misinterpreted. Remove the Gospel of John from the New Testament equation and there is very little left in the Trinitarian’s armoury to appeal to for evidence of the divinity of Jesus. If you take away this Gospel, any Biblical foundation for the Trinity, ambiguous or otherwise, comes crashing down. So from a Trinitarian’s perspective the stakes for the Gospel of John are very high. The link below gives 10 reasons that the Gospel of John is not a reliable historical account of the life and teachings of Jesus:

http://manyprophetsonemessage.com/2015/05/12/ten-reasons-why-we-must-reject-the-gospel-of-john/

1. It takes a Divinity to accept worship (not even angels accept worship but all the Gospels show Jesus accepting the worship from men).

2. The Gospel of John records that Jesus is the Son of God; the other Gospels affirm same! Eg John 5:26,27 = Matthew 25:31= Luke 1:32,35 = Luke 2:49=Matthew 16:16=Mark 9:7 etc

3. The Epistle to the Colossians establishes the Divinity and Supremacy of Christ as a rebuttal to the claims of gnostics then and neo-gnostics now (those who kind of deny the divinity of Christ!. or submit that He is a sort of lesser 'god'!.) I invite you to read the entire book to aid an appreciation of the Supremacy and Centrality of Christ.

4. Finally, kindly take Revelations 22:18,19 seriously.

Stay blessed.

Very sad!

11[b]Because the sentence against an evil work [size=13pt]is not executed speedily[/size], therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil[/b].
Ecclesiastes 8:11

That a person has indulged in fornication and adultery for years and nothing happened does not mean there is an immunity; some times chance for repentance is given. Unfortunately, many misconstrue this as license to continue.

When we persist in sin, an hedge is broken and the serpent will strike. Think!

Most of the results listed in the op are just symptoms of the attack of the serpent when our hedge is broken down.

Even believers are not exempted:

Galatians 2:17
But if, in our desire and endeavor to be justified in Christ [to be declared righteous and put in right standing with God wholly and solely through Christ], we have shown ourselves sinners also and convicted of sin, does that make Christ a minister (a party and contributor) to our sin? Banish the thought! [Of course not!]


A believer walking in holiness (by the power of the Holy Spirit) is not without an accuser how much more a so called 'saint' that indulges in sexual immorality? (No wonder deliverance patients continue to increase by the day even among believers!!!.)

Nice